FEBRUARY, 1794.] Contested Election of Mr. Gallatin. [SENATE. uralized in England, as if they had been na- | the petitioners would admit of, for by this contural-born subjects of that country. The al-struction, our sailors, &c., ought to be naturallegiance in Britain was personal to the King, ized, lest they be alarmed by the British and it has there this remarkable quality, that by the British laws allegiance can never be shaken off. This country, before the Revolution, owed allegiance to the King, but that was destroyed by the Declaration of Independence, and then the inhabitants of the States became mutually citizens of every State reciprocally; and they continued so until such time as the States made laws of their own afterwards respecting naturalization. The new Constitution of the United States requires certain qualifications for members of Congress, &c., but it does not deprive persons of their rights who were actually citizens before the constitution was ratified that made the States the United States. They were united by consent before, and consequently he was one of the people before the United States existed. He went on to read from the Constitution of Massachusetts, and several other States, sundry clauses in support of his reasoning, and recapitulated the several heads of Mr. L.'s argu As soon as separate governments existed, allegiance was due to each, and here the alle-ments, to each of which he replied. giance was a reality, it was to the Government Mr. G. said, that Mr. Lewis was unfortunate and to society, whereas in Britain it is merely fictitious, being only to one man. Every man who took an active part in the American Revolution, was a citizen according to the great laws of reason and of nature, and when afterwards positive laws were made, they were retrospective in regard to persons under this predicament, nor did those posterior laws invalidate the rights which they enjoy under the Confederation. Mr. G. here mentioned his having been an inhabitant of Massachusetts before October, 1780, and he also observed, that the law passed in that State was decisive against the Common Law of England. In quoting the laws of Massachusetts, which were passed in 1785, and afterwards, for naturalizing John Gardner, and James Martin, he remarked that they clearly implied that even a natural born subject, who had not acted in the Revolution, and an absentee, was not entitled to citizenship. He likewise took notice of the case of Mr. WILLIAM SMITH, of South Carolina, against whose election as a Representative in Congress, a petition was presented by Doctor Ramsay, although the decision of South Carolina on that subject was exactly the reverse of Massachusetts. In speaking of the difficulties that occurred in explaining the terms citizen and alien, he ran over a number of cases, and asked whether if a person had arrived in the United States during the war, from Nova-Scotia, or elsewhere, and had taken an active part against the enemy, would he not be better entitled to the right of a citizen, than even those who afterwards subscribed to the acts? The counsel for the prosecutors had admitted that a person who had been one of the mass of the people, at the Declaration of Independence, was a citizen. On the same principle, until a law passes to disprove that a man who was active in the Revolution previous to the treaty of peace, was a citizen, he must be one ipse facto. Mr. G next read a quotation from the 1st vol. of Woodison, p. 382, an English writer, who acknowledged that all persons were aliens at the recognition of independence, and that is a more liberal construction than the council for in producing the law of Pennsylvania, for, by proving too much, he had proved nothing, for the 42d sec. of the constitution is retrospective, and by acknowledging the Articles of Confederation to be the supreme law of the laud, persons who were reciprocally citizens before, are still left in full possession of the right. So far from any dangerous consequences arising on my construction of citizenship, said he, I think it must be evident, that there is more danger and absurdity in the counsel's own constructions. For, in remarking on the policy of nations, we find even slaves have been enfranchised by the great republics in times of common danger. The policy of America should be to make citizenship as easy as possible, for the purpose of encouraging population; even during the British dominion that was a principle laid down, and afterwards it was attempted to be varied; it is made one of the principal subjects of complaint in the Declaration of Independence, where it is expressly said, that the king endeavored to prevent the population of these States, by having laws made to obstruct the naturalization of foreigners. If there were any dangerous consequences to be apprehended from the former regulations on this subject, they are all remedied by the new constitution. Therefore, no ill consequence or absurdity can follow. The author of the Federalist supports this principle in vol. ii. p. 54, for he says, that it is a construction scarcely avoidable, that citizens of each of the States are mutually so in all of them. The first words in the constitution, "We the People," furnished another argument in support of Mr. G.'s principles, which he turned to great advantage, still drawing an inference to show that Mr. L.'s construction of the subject was most liable to difficulties and to mischievous consequences. He concluded by observing, that if there was any disfranchising clauses in the Constitution of the United States, tending to deprive citizens of antecedent rights, all such clauses must be construed favorably, and were evidently on his side. With regard to a sentence that had been added, by the advice of counsel, to the affidavit of Pelatiah Webster, he made some remarks which tended to establish his own personal character, which he trusted would be found, when traced back to his nativity, to stand the test; and that his right to a seat in the Senate would also stand upon an equally just foundation. Mr. Lewis denied having ever seen the affidavit of Mr. Webster, until it was shown him at the time the examination before the committee was going forward. Mr. GALLATIN recriminated, that the clause of which he took notice, was not in the affidavit when Mr. Webster brought it to the committee, and that he had permitted it to be added with great reluctance. It was only the recital of a few words which passed between Mr. G. and Mr. W. in jest, some years since, wherein Mr. G. had ironically said his name was Sidney, probably. alluding to some essays that had appeared in the newspapers under that signature, which had been generally attributed to the pen of another gentleman in the State. Mr. JACKSON, in order to bring the merits of the subject directly before the Senate, said he would move a resolution, that would have that effect; but upon Mr. Lewis's observing, that he had not yet closed his arguments, and at the instance of Mr. BUTLER, from South Carolina, who said he would second Mr. JACKSON'S motion hereafter, it was withdrawn for the present. Ordered, That the further consideration thereof be postponed until to-morrow. SATURDAY, February 22. The Senate resumed the consideration of the report of the committee on the petition of Conrad Laub, and others, respecting the election of Mr. GALLATIN to be a Senator of the United States. The greater part of the day was taken up by Mr. Lewis's pleadings, wherein he entered into a very extensive field of reasoning, and quoted a great number of authorities, in support of the principles on which he had set out last Thursday, and to prove that in the true sense of the Constitution of the United States, as well as of that of the State of Pennsylvania, Mr. GALLATIN was not duly qualified for the office of a Senator, and therefore, he trusted that the honorable Senate, upon mature reflection, would vacate his seat. [FEBRUARY, 1794, Ordered, That the further consideration of the subject be postponed until Monday next. A motion was made as follows: "Resolved, That ALBERT GALLATIN, returned to this House as a member for the State of Pennsylvania, is duly qualified for, and elected to, a seat in the Senate of the United States." Ordered, That the consideration of this motion be postponed until Monday next, and that a number of copies of the fourth article of the First Confederation of the United States be printed for the use of the Senate. MONDAY, February 24. The Senate resumed the consideration of the motion made the twenty-second instant, on the report of the committee on the petition of Conrad Laub, and others, respecting the election of Mr. GALLATIN to be a Senator of the United States; and, after progress, Ordered, That the further consideration thereof be postponed until to-morrow. FRIDAY, February 28. The Senate resumed the consideration of the 22d instant, on the report of the committee on the petition of Conrad Laub, and others, respecting the election of Mr. GALLATIN to be a Sena tor of the United States. And, on the question to agree to the motion, as follows: "Resolved, That ALBERT GALLATIN, returned to this House as a member for the State of Pennsylvania, is duly qualified for, and elected to, a seat in the Senate of the United States: " It passed in the negative-yeas 12, nays 14, as follows: YEAS.-Messrs. Bradley, Brown, Burr, Butler, Edwards, Gunn, Jackson, Langdon, Martin, Monroe, Robinson, and Taylor. NAYS.-Messrs. Bradford, Cabot, Ellsworth, Foster, Mitchell, Morris, Potts, Strong, and Vining. Frelinghuysen, Hawkins, Izard, King, Livermore, A motion was made to divide the question at the word "void; " and, On motion to agree to the first paragraph of the motion so divided, it passed in the affirmative-yeas 14, nays 12, as follows: YEAS.-Messrs. Bradford, Cabot, Ellsworth, Foster, Frelinghuysen, Hawkins, Izard, King, Livermore, Mitchell, Morris, Potts, Strong, and Vining. Mr. GALLATIN closed his defence in a short speech, wherein he quoted Vattel, p. 167, and explained the 42d section of the Constitution of Pennsylvania, the liberal construction of which, he said, was in his favor, and the construction contended for by the counsel, absurd. He finished by reading a passage from Lord Bacon's works, to show that where there is any doubt in the laws, it should operate in favor of the On motion to adopt the resolution as follows: defendant, and he accordingly made no doubt "Resolved, That the election of Albert GALLATIN but that the Senate would validate his election. I to be a Senator of the United States was void, he not NAYS.-Messrs. Bradley, Brown, Burr, Butler, Edwards, Gunn, Jackson, Langdon, Martin, Monroe, Robinson, and Taylor. MARCH, 1794.] Election of Kensey Johns. [SENATE. having been a citizen of the United States the term | STATES, in certain cases, to alter the place for of years required as a qualification to be a Senator of holding a session of Congress. the United States: " THURSDAY, March 13. The bill authorizing and directing the ment of the accounts of Major General LAFAYResolved, That this bill pass, that it be engrossed, and that the title thereof be "An act allowing to Major General LAFAYETTE his pay and emoluments while in the service of the United States." KENSEY JOHNS appeared and produced his credentials of an appointment by the Governor of the State of Delaware as a Senator for the United States, which were read. FRIDAY, March 28. The Senate resumed the consideration of the report of the Committee of Elections, to whom was referred the credentials of Kensey Johns, appointed by the Executive of the State of Delaware to be a Senator of the United States; which report is as follows: "The Committee of Elections, to whom were referred the credentials of an appointment by the Governor of the State of Delaware, of Kensey Johns, as a Senator of the United States, having had the same under consideration, report— "That George Read, a Senator for the State of Delaware, resigned his seat upon the 18th day of December, 1793, and during the recess of the Legislature of said State. "Whereupon, the committee submit the following resolution: Governor of the State of Delaware, as a Senator of "Resolved, That Kensey Johns, appointed by the the United States, for said State, is not entitled to a Whereupon, it was moved that they be referred to the consideration of the Committee of Elections before the said KENSEY JOHNS should be permitted to qualify, who are directed to re-seat in the Senate of the United States; a session of port thereon; and it passed in the affirmative yeas 13, nays 12, as follows: YEAS.-Messrs. Bradley, Brown, Burr, Edwards, Gunn, Hawkins, Jackson, Langdon, Livermore, Martin, Monroe, Robinson, and Taylor. NAYS.-Messrs Bradford, Cabot, Ellsworth, Foster, Frelinghuysen, Izard, Mitchell, Morris, Potts, Rutherford, Strong, and Vining. The Senate resumed the second reading of the bill to authorize the PRDSIDENT OF THE UNITED the Legislature of the said State having intervened between the resignation of the said George Read and the appointment of the said Kensey Johns." On the question to agree to this report, it passed in the affirmative yeas 20, nays 7, as follows: YEAS.-Messrs. Bradford, Bradley, Brown, Burr, Butler, Cabot, Edwards, Ellsworth, Frelinghuysen, Gunn, Hawkins, Jackson, King, Langdon, Livermore, Martin, Mitchell, Monroe, Robinson, and Taylor. SENATE.] Adjournment. NAYS.-Messrs. Foster, Izard, Morris, Potts, Rutherford, Strong, and Vining. Resolved, That an attested copy of the resolution of the Senate, on the appointment of Kensey Johns to be a Senator of the United States, be transmitted, by the PRESIDENT of the Senate, to the Executive of the State of Delaware. TUESDAY, May 20. [JUNE, 1794. The Message and papers therein referred to were read, and ordered to lie for consideration. WEDNESDAY, May 21. The following Message was received from the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Gentlemen of the Senate, and of the House of Representatives: I lay before you, in confidence, sundry papers by The following Message was received from the which you will perceive the state of affairs between PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Gentlemen of the Senate, and of the House of Representatives: In the communications which I have made to Congress during the present session relative to foreign nations, I have omitted no opportunity of testifying my anxiety to preserve the United States in peace. It is peculiarly, therefore, my duty, at this time to lay before you the present state of certain hostile threats against the territories of Spain in our neighborhood. The documents which accompany this message develope the measures which I have taken to suppress them, and the intelligence which has been lately re ceived. It will be seen from thence that the subject has not been neglected; that every power vested in the Executive on such occasions has been exerted; and that there was reason to believe that the enterprise projected against the Spanish dominions was relinquished. But it appears to have been revived upon principles which set public order at defiance, and place the peace of the United States in the discretion of unauthorized individuals. The means already deposited in the different departments of Government are shown, by experience, not to be adequate to these high exigencies, although such of them as are lodged in the hands of the Executive shall continue to be used with promptness, energy, and decision, proportioned to the But I am impelled, by the position of our public affairs, to recommend that provision be made for a stronger and more vigorous opposition than can be given to such hostile movements under the laws as they now stand. case. G. WASHINGTON. UNITED STATES, May 20, 1794. us and the Six Nations, and the probable cause to which it is owing; and also certain information, whereby it would appear that some encroachment was about to be made on our territory by an officer and party of British troops. Proceeding upon a supposition of the authenticity of this information, although of a private nature, I have caused the representation to be made to the British Minister, a copy of which accompanies this Message. It cannot be necessary to comment upon the very serious nature of such an encroachment, nor to urge that this new state of things suggests the propriety of placing the United States in a posture of effectual preparation for an event which, notwithstanding the endeavors making to avert it, may, by circumstances beyond our control, be forced upon us. G. WASHINGTON. UNITED STATES, May 21, 1794. The Message and papers therein referred to were read, and ordered to lie for consideration. MONDAY, June 9. A message from the House of Representatives informed the Senate, that the House, having finished the business of the session, are about to adjourn. of Representatives, that the Senate likewise, Ordered, That the Secretary notify the House having finished the business of the session, are about to adjourn; and, he having reported that he had delivered the message, the PRESIDENT of the Senate, conformably to the resolution of the 5th instant, adjourned the Senate to the day appointed by law for the next meeting of Congress. MONDAY, December 2, 1798. This being the day appointed by the constitution for the meeting of the present Congress, the following members appeared and took their seats: From New Hampshire.-NICHOLAS GILMAN, JOHN S. SHERBURNE, JEREMIAH SMITH, and PAINE WINGATE. From Massachusetts.-SHEARJASHUB BOURNE, DAVID COBB, HENRY DEARBORN, BENJAMIN GOODHUE, SAMUEL HOLTEN, WILLIAM LYMAN, THEODORE SEDGWICK, GEORGE THATCHER, and ARTEMAS WARD. From Connecticut.-AMASA LEARNED, URIAH TRACEY, JONATHAN TRUMBULL, and JEREMIAH WADSWORTH. From Vermont.-ISRAEL SMITH. From New York.-THEODORUS BAILEY, EZEKIEL GILBERT, HENRY GLENN, JAMES GORDON, SILAS TALBOT, JOHN E. VAN ALLEN, PHILIP VAN CORTLANDT, PETER VAN GAASBECK, and JOHN WATTS. From New Jersey. JOHN BEATTY, ELIAS BOUDINOT, LAMBERT CADWALADER, ABRAHAM CLARK, and JONATHAN DAYTON. From Pennsylvania. -JAMES ARMSTRONG, WILLIAM FINDLAY, THOMAS FITZSIMONS, ANDREW GREGG, THOMAS HARTLEY, WILLIAM IRVINE, JOHN WILKES KITTERA, FREDERICK AUGUSTUS MUHLENBERG, PETER MUHLENBERG, THOMAS SCOTT, and JOHN SMILIE. From Maryland.-GEORGE DENT and SAMUEL SMITH. From Virginia.-WILLIAM B. GILES, CARTER B. HARRISON, JOHN HEATH, RICHARD BLAND LEE, JAMES MADISON, ANDREW MOORE, ANTHONY NEW, JOHN NICHOLAS, FRANCIS PRESTON, ROBERT RUTHERFORD, ABRAHAM VENABLE, and FRANCIS WALKER. From Kentucky.-CHRISTOPHER GREENUP. From North Carolina.-THOMAS BLOUNT, WILLIAM JOHNSON DAWSON, MATTHEW LOCKE, NATHANIEL MACON, and ALEXANDER MEBANE. From South Carolina.-WILLIAM SMITH. From Georgia. -ABRAHAM BALDWIN and THOMAS P. CARNES. A quorum of the members being present, the House proceeded to ballot for a Speaker, when it appeared that FREDERICK A. MUHLENBERG, one of the members from Pennsylvania, was elected; whereupon he was conducted to the chair, and made his acknowledgments to the House.* The House then proceeded, in the same manner, to the appointment of a Clerk, when JOHN BECKLEY was appointed. The usual oath was then administered to the members. Messages were interchanged between the two Houses, announcing their formation and readiness to proceed to business. Joseph Wheaton was appointed Sergeant-atArms, Gifford Dally as Doorkeeper, and Thomas Claxton as Assistant Doorkeeper. A joint committee was appointed by the two Houses to wait on the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, to inform him that a quorum of the two Houses is assembled, and ready to receive any communication that he may think proper to make to them. Resolved, That two Chaplains, of different denominations, be appointed, one by each House, to interchange weekly. Resolved, That a standing Committee of Elections be appointed; also a committee to report rules and orders of proceeding. TUESDAY, December 8. JOSEPH MCDOWELL and BENJAMIN WILLIAMS, from North Carolina, appeared, and took their seats. This was a party election, and as such conducted on both sides. Marshall, in his Life of Washington, says of it: "By each party a candidate for the chair was brought forward; and Mr. Muhlenberg, who was supported by the opposition, was elected by a majority of ten votes against Mr. Sedgwick whom the Federalists supported." |